Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

If you voted to leave the EU, Don't bother wearing the poppy... Watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinel)
    With all the talk about NATO breaking up and Russia expanding its influence in Europe is it so difficult to imagine a scenario in which states are pitted against each other?

    Germany is seriously considering such eventualities in its recent policy document, Strategic Perspective 2040:
    https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...ope-we-are-too
    Oh please. Britain leaving the EU will result in NATO breaking up? States being 'pitted against each other' means war, automatically? I've seen a lot of states being pitted against each other within the framework of the EU - Greece and its creditors, Poland and Hungary versus the Germans - and it doesn't seem that they'll be joining Russia anytime soon. Ironically, if they do, the EU is partly to blame. I presume you know which section of the article I'm referring to.

    The fact that contingency plans have been made does not mean that the risk of 'Europe breaking up' (whatever that means) is, in absolute terms, significant enough for any military action or alliance shifting to be possible. And yes, feel free to tell me that the risk of war has gone up by a negligible amount. I don't care. No one bar the people who are employed solely to cover extreme scenarios cares.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    People still peddling this line about the EU being a force for preventing war?

    That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.

    The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It comes to something when a national newspaper is that desperate to get headlines that they put up an article like this which is full of inaccuracies and just rambles. Does the idiot that wrote it have any literary merits? He obviously has no literary morals. Pound of flesh for the trashy article sir?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    People still peddling this line about the EU being a force for preventing war?

    That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.

    The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
    Not aware those were EU member countries then.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nutz99)
    It comes to something when a national newspaper is that desperate to get headlines that they put up an article like this which is full of inaccuracies and just rambles. Does the idiot that wrote it have any literary merits? He obviously has no literary morals. Pound of flesh for the trashy article sir?
    As much as I think the Independent is just junk, it's the way it is for newspapers. They're all desperate to not become extinct, and the only way to prevent that is to become more and more polarising and attention seeking. Pretty much every newspaper has done that.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    As much as I think the Independent is just junk, it's the way it is for newspapers. They're all desperate to not become extinct, and the only way to prevent that is to become more and more polarising and attention seeking. Pretty much every newspaper has done that.
    Unfortunately there are far too many people that actually believe the drivel that is in our daily newspapers. Newspapers no longer report facts. In a lot of instances, they are about as factual as Harry Potter. They either want to sensationalise an article or give it a deliberately misleading political leaning. Don't think I've actually bought a paper in years - plenty of Metros passed through my hands though
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    its a simple argument - but one that does, at a simple level make a lot of sense.

    EU = partly made to prevent war between European countries
    Poppies = remembering those who died in wars
    Anti-EU + Poppies = contradiction.

    The problem is to anyone who actually wants to delve in and examine the logic, it does not hold up well:

    The main problem with it lies with what is actually the root cause of the lack of war between developed nations in the modern world. Is it the EU? No. Its globalization.

    The globalization of wealth and trade (among others) had brought and end to traditional war between developed nations as it has created a situation where war is simply no longer beneficial. We now have nations that are interdependent on each other and if one were to fall the other would too.

    Did the EU help this? Yes. No question here - the EU was one of the first and most successful experiments in globalization, and it did create an interdependent Europe that would avoid war.

    However where this argument falls down is that this is not the 1980s any more. Now in 2017 the EU is actually one of the forces against the progress of globalization. It has declared that interconnections stop at Europe, and shall go no further. Hence why you see a raft of protectionism, isolationism, and pro-European-only policies.

    Its the reason why a (admittedly small) group of pro-globalization individuals, including many tory MPs voted to leave.. its because they see that now the world has moved past the EU and true globalization means trade, immigration, networks and links with the whole world, not just Europe.

    Europe is not the center of the world as it was when the last world wars happened, and it could be very easily argued that the EUs lack of will towards true world-wide globalization is actually a hindrance to the progress towards world-wide peace.

    -- anyway, I could go on, but the point is that intial aims do not nessasarily equate to current day outcomes, and these days the abilities and scope of the EU to prevent war has been vastly out-grown by international globalisation and interconectivity.. some of which the EU actually stands against.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    I think The Independent is trash.
    Yep. The Independent is the real gutter press.

    The article in OP is just a terrible piece of content, regardless of its ideology. His prose is bad, his points are bad, and he appears to have no real grasp of how to link points to each other or to the article's title. He just meanders between apparently unconnected points until his article... stops. I was going to deconstruct how bad it is but it's really a larger task than I want to tackle.

    I'd just draw attention to the fact that, in an article that sets itself up to take down Brexiteers, his penultimate paragraph is:

    Who is really destroying this country? People who don’t wear poppies or people who don’t pay their taxes so we can fund public services?
    And he ends with:

    If people really want to understand the First World War, they may be well on their way to creating a world in which they'll get to relive it.
    Wh-what? :laugh:

    What an absolute disaster it is that this outlet gets so much attention on social media.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I read that article and I swear I got at least 3 malignant tumours afterwards. It's the most poorly argued mess I've ever seen.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Retired_Messiah)
    I read that article and I swear I got at least 3 malignant tumours afterwards. It's the most poorly argued mess I've ever seen.
    inneh OMFG!!!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Whilst I think the vote to leave was an act of economic self-harm, it has nothing to do with wearing a poppy (or not), and remembering those who have died in war. I would expect many if not most families in the UK had a relative who died in one of the two world wars, either whilst serving in the military or as a civilian whose house was bombed.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well, I don't want to say this, but I'm going to anyway, it's the reaction suitable for such a stupid article. People fought and died in WW2 to stop Germany taking over Europe, and look which which country is in charge of the EU now?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    People still peddling this line about the EU being a force for preventing war?

    That was part of the early remit of the EEC, which bears no resemblance whatsoever to the EU. The real hallmarks of the European project have been increasing supranational political power and spending an awful lot of money on farming subsidies. That's a far cry from preventing war by fiddling with the steel and coal industries - and didn't even include us.

    The real start of the EU was Maastricht - and what happened straight after that? Genocide in the Balkans, which the EU failed utterly to do anything about on its own doorstep.
    I through it was the UN peace keeper who did nothing to stop the genocide in the Balkans after the full of the USSR.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It would be fair to say that it was actually the older demographic of voters that chose to vote brexit - the same generations that have actually fought in our historical conflicts. To suggest such a statement is just typical left wing sensationalism that prevents them ever gaining traction.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by looloo2134)
    I through it was the UN peace keeper who did nothing to stop the genocide in the Balkans after the full of the USSR.
    At least the UN were there, and depending on the nation, some did their best within their remits. The EU, which some people are so fond of saying today is some great force for peace in Europe, came into being the same year as the War in the Former Yugoslavia started - and did pretty much nothing as war happened in Europe.

    If the very first major event following the formation of the EU is a genocidal civil war with mass displacements, murders and ethnic cleansing - how exactly are we to believe that the EU is in any way an organisation capable of keeping peace? The great proponents of the EU - people like Mitterand did pretty much nothing and the kind of talk we are used to hearing today about "not bombing". Well, the War went on for years with thousands of deaths, ethnic cleansing and rapes - and what was it that sorted it out in the end? NATO air strikes.

    How anyone can believe that the EU has contributed to peace in Europe in any meaningful way is beyond me.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by YaliaV)
    I love that they are trying to dictate how people behave, think and feel, and then talk about the tyranny that we fought during the war - this level of control and manipulation is probably why a lot of people chose to leave. The EU is a very flawed and self-serving body and Europe is about more than that.
    Thats a cute argument, the level of hypocrisy is particularly galling though.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Not aware those were EU member countries then.
    What difference does it make? If the EU is supposed to be this grand project of peace and security (which it isn't - it's a naked political power grab) what good is it if it's utterly impotent in a genocide on its own doorstep within weeks of its foundation?

    The answer is- the EU was powerless to do anything because it has never been anything to do with peace in Europe in any real sense. It's about making the club richer and more powerful at any cost.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    If you legitimately think someone ought to not wear a poppy because of how they voted, please don't wear one yourself.

    I've no doubt our ancestors would be rolling their eyes that this is the future they fought to protect.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Trinculo)
    What difference does it make? If the EU is supposed to be this grand project of peace and security (which it isn't - it's a naked political power grab) what good is it if it's utterly impotent in a genocide on its own doorstep within weeks of its foundation?

    The answer is- the EU was powerless to do anything because it has never been anything to do with peace in Europe in any real sense. It's about making the club richer and more powerful at any cost.
    Whose powergrab? Your conspiracy theories are laughable.

    And why, should they play world police like America? No thanks.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Whose powergrab? Your conspiracy theories are laughable.

    And why, should they play world police like America? No thanks.
    How is it a conspiracy theory that the EU project is a powergrab? An organisation that used to give out farming subsidies to a few countries and tell people where they could fish - now tells people who is rich and who is poor, controls their central banks, has common currency and tells nations who can come and go and has supremacy over all courts within member states? That's not a power grab?

    As for world policing - what planet are you on? This discussion is about whether or not the EU is an organisation rooted in keeping peace in Europe. Presumably your answer to peace in the Balkans would have been to wait until everyone was dead and then declare that the killing had come to an end.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.